When did these players begin their decline in your opinon [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

When did these players begin their decline in your opinon

SetSampras
03-17-2012, 11:50 PM
Nadal
Roddick
Federer
Nalbandian
Sampras
Agassi
Davydenko
Safin
Hewitt

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 12:03 AM
Some players decline a little and get back, it gets difficult when the curve is not your typical one peak and straight/curved line down.

Federer started to decline in 2007 but stopped in 2009 his decline and hasnt declined much since then.

Nadal had 2 peaks in 2008 and 2010, started to decline in 2011, surprisingly the line hasnt gone straight down but he seems to still be declining at a slow pace.

Sampras started decline in 96 but still had a good 97 because of 2 very easy slam draws that year, definitive decline started in 98 and the line was straight down (unlike Federer)

Agassi had his best year 94-95, declined for reasons outside tennis and came back to dominate a weak era in 99, continued his natural decline in 00 forward but at a slow pace.

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 12:07 AM
Safin clearly had a roller coaster career from 00 to 05 and then finally declined at a very fast pace, didnt fight hard enought to stay good at an old age.

Nalbandian probably had his best years 05-07, seems to appear out of nowhere to go on winning streaks against top players at certain periods, he started to decline in 08.

Roddick in my opinion was at his absolute best in 03-04 and never found his game since he started to experiment with a whole new approach to challenge Federer in 05 forward. He was still good in 06, definetly was declining at a fast rate in 07.

Hewitt was very good between 01-04 with one bad year in between, started to decline slowly in 05 but was still very good (like Federer 07) but in 06 he was no longer a top player.


Davydenko reminds me of Nalbandian suddenly having short periods where he plays great tennis and disappears for long periods of time, he appeared from nowhere in 06 and became a top player very fast and produced some great results every year from 06-09 even if every year he seemed to be gone during a big part of the year. Definetly declined in 2010 after finding his absolute peak in late 09 and early 10, after his choke against Federer in AO the old Davydenko was never to be seen again on court.

Sapeod
03-18-2012, 12:10 AM
Federer started declining in 2007, fell quite a bit in 2008, but regained his form in 2009 and then started declining slowly since then. He's probably got the slowest decline I've ever seen :lol: It's incredibly hard to see the difference between 2010 Federer and 2012 Federer :lol:

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-18-2012, 12:10 AM
Nadal in his prime
Roddick 2007
Federer 2007
Nalbandian injuries screwed him over- he never regained his 2005 form- but in 2007 he showed glimpses
Sampras 1997
Agassi 2003
Davydenko maybe 2010- maybe
Safin he ddint decline he just stopped giving a fuck
Hewitt 2005

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-18-2012, 12:13 AM
federers slow decline is the stuff of legends

really must piss of the haters that rog can still play at such a high level

.... truth is that the era is so shit right now- fed is allowed to stay high because of how incredibly weak the overall top 50 is

its probably the worst tennis era in recorded history- even when rolland garros was french ametuer only- it was 100 times stronger than today

tennis offically died in 2008- and untill we see surface variance it wont be coming back

rob_z
03-18-2012, 12:15 AM
Nadal isn't really in decline in my opinion. He was in 2011 in 3 slam finals and in many finals of ATP 1000 master tournaments. The problem wasthat he lost to Nole every time. If Djokovic hadn't play so well in 2011, Nadal would probably have won 3 slams last year and still be number 1. Probably Nadals game in 2010 was better, but 2011 wasn't that bad.

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 12:18 AM
Nadal isn't really in decline in my opinion. He was in 2011 in 3 slam finals and in many finals of ATP 1000 master tournaments. The problem wasthat he lost to Nole every time. If Djokovic hadn't play so well in 2011, Nadal would probably have won 3 slams last year. Probably Nadals game in 2010 was better, but 2011 wasn't that bad.

If Nadal wasnt declining in 2011 then should I say Federer was declining in 2007 when he won 8 titles and 3 slams?

Nadal's 2011 actually reminds me more of Fed 2008, Nadal had 3 titles and Fed 4, Nadal 3 slam finals and Fed 3 slam finals, Fed dominated by Nadal and Nadal dominated by Djokovic and so on.

Chase Visa
03-18-2012, 12:23 AM
Nadal (still at or near his peak, IMO)
Roddick (2006 or 2011, depending on your prejorative. Declined very slowly)
Federer (2008)
Nalbandian (2006, though it's hard to say what his 'peak' was)
Sampras (2000)
Agassi (2006)
Davydenko (2010)
Safin (2005)
Hewitt (2006)

Johnny Groove
03-18-2012, 12:25 AM
Peaks and valleys, baby.

Peaks and valleys.

BroTree123
03-18-2012, 12:27 AM
Wheres Djokovic?

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 12:28 AM
Nadal (still at or near his peak, IMO)
Roddick (2006 or 2011, depending on your prejorative. Declined very slowly)
Federer (2008)
Nalbandian (2006, though it's hard to say what his 'peak' was)
Sampras (2000)
Agassi (2006)
Davydenko (2010)
Safin (2005)
Hewitt (2006)

Sampras started to decline when he was 2 years older than Federer and Agassi in 2006? Really? :lol:

Filo V.
03-18-2012, 12:30 AM
Hewitt declined in the mid-2000s but the reality is that the game passed him by more than he just straight declined. Even today, he's proven he could probably be a top 20-30 player if he could play a full season.

rob_z
03-18-2012, 12:39 AM
If Nadal wasnt declining in 2011 then should I say Federer was declining in 2007 when he won 8 titles and 3 slams?

Nadal's 2011 actually reminds me more of Fed 2008, Nadal had 3 titles and Fed 4, Nadal 3 slam finals and Fed 3 slam finals, Fed dominated by Nadal and Nadal dominated by Djokovic and so on.

It's what the definition of decline is. :rolleyes: If player X plays great tennis as good as ever, but a competitor improves strongly. Than I don't really consider it a decline of player X. Than I think that his competitor has improved, but not necessarily that player X declined. I consider a decline when the personal quality of tennis of player X goes strongly down.
Although you might also look from a different perspective indeed: looking purely to the rankings and statistics. And than it is true that player X was on the rankings surpassed, because his competitor improved so much. So on the rankings/statistics he declined indeed.

So the question is:
Should decline be based on the moment that the quality of tennis of somebody's own personal game goes down?
Or should decline be based on the time when he starts to fall in the overall rankings?
:confused:
I would go for the first definition. But you can discuss about it.:D

Mountaindewslave
03-18-2012, 01:27 AM
Nadal hasn't declined, he just was barely stopped at Australia and can beat practically every player on tour. if he has declined then that would mean the tour was so horrible right now and that Nadal's best is way better than any other current players, which isn't exactly true.

absurd to assume Nadal has declined. he does everything as well as before. give it a year and if he has failed to win some titles and even seems hindered on clay then we will all have to agree. currently no signs point to any decline. the fact that Nadal is mentioned by the OP in this makes me not even want to address the other decline points

tennishero
03-18-2012, 01:51 AM
wheres murray?

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 11:18 AM
Is Federer right now better than he has been since 2010? Maybe even since 2008?

Sri
03-18-2012, 11:39 AM
Is Federer right now better than he has been since 2010? Maybe even since 2008?
In physical ability, no.

In mental aspects, probably yes.

Just like heaven
03-18-2012, 12:00 PM
Rafa has declined. I don't know how much but the way he loses leads and gets broken when things get tight or even the way he fails to close out the matches is a clear sign that he's not as strong as he was a couple of years ago.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 12:30 PM
Federer and Nadal are not in decline. Players simply have ups and downs. Look at Federer's form over the past 5-6 months. He's playing as well as he ever has. And Nadal has often gone through patches like this.

This is the usual MTF shit we're used to. 99% of the forum have no long term memory. It's as if everything before the current tournament never happened. If Nadal wins Miami, we'll hear about him dominating the clay court stretch again. If Djokovic wins Miami, we'll hear about him being a cert for the Golden Slam. If Federer wins Miami, he'll be on his way to world number 1 again this year. If Murray wins Miami, we'll have threads about him winning his first slam very soon. It's the same shit over and over. This forum is simply populated by idiots who can't recall what happened as recently as 2 weeks ago.

Half of that is not related to the subject of this thread, but posting it here is as good a place as any.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 12:34 PM
Is Federer right now better than he has been since 2010? Maybe even since 2008?

Federer is as good now as he was in 2006 and certainly better than 2007. He is playing incredible tennis at the moment. You can't always measure a player's form by the number of slams they win in a given year. 2005 Federer was superior to 2007 Federer, despite being less successful.

Start da Game
03-18-2012, 03:26 PM
based on purely level of play which is the real definition of peak:

Nadal - peaked in 2008, yet to decline.....

Roddick - peaked in wimbledon 2009 and declined after the final in the same tournament.....

Federer - peaked in 2007, yet to decline.....

Nalbandian - peaked in 2003, dug a deep well after 2006 and is resting inside ever since.....climbed out for a brief span in 2007 and went back in.....

Sampras - peaked in 1992, declined in 2000.....

Agassi - peaked in 1992, declined in 2001....

Davydenko - indefinite

Safin - indefinite

Hewitt - indefinite

rickcastle
03-18-2012, 03:32 PM
Federer is as good now as he was in 2006

:haha: :haha: :haha:

Allez
03-18-2012, 03:45 PM
Federer is as good now as he was in 2006 and certainly better than 2007.
Oh no you didn't. Not after that vitriol about 99% of MTF having long term memory problems :haha:

Allez
03-18-2012, 04:00 PM
Nadal - 2015 (Ridiculous having a 25 year old on this list :rolleyes: )
Roddick - 2004 (Why did he change his game)
Federer - 2008 (If you blinked you'd have missed the subtle signs)
Nalbandian - 2004 (only because he started getting rounder around the waist)
Safin - 2006 (Was at his peak at THAT 2005 AO)
Hewitt - 2005 (Well the game passed him by really the AO final notwithstanding)

Clydey
03-18-2012, 04:05 PM
Oh no you didn't. Not after that vitriol about 99% of MTF having long term memory problems :haha:

He is playing as well now as he ever has. That is not the same as me saying that his level didn't dip at any point. His level has picked up again in the past 6 months. How can you possibly look at his current form and argue that he is inferior to 2006 Fed? He is playing incredible tennis. He has barely lost a match since last summer.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 04:09 PM
Federer - 2008 (If you blinked you'd have missed the subtle signs)


There was nothing subtle about it.

finishingmove
03-18-2012, 04:17 PM
Nadal is not declining yet.

Federer is in his best form since 2008 when he started declining. 2009 was a bit lucky for him, playing Soderling and Roddick in slam finals, but he is definitely declining.

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 04:22 PM
It's what the definition of decline is. :rolleyes: If player X plays great tennis as good as ever, but a competitor improves strongly. Than I don't really consider it a decline of player X. Than I think that his competitor has improved, but not necessarily that player X declined. I consider a decline when the personal quality of tennis of player X goes strongly down.
Although you might also look from a different perspective indeed: looking purely to the rankings and statistics. And than it is true that player X was on the rankings surpassed, because his competitor improved so much. So on the rankings/statistics he declined indeed.

So the question is:
Should decline be based on the moment that the quality of tennis of somebody's own personal game goes down?
Or should decline be based on the time when he starts to fall in the overall rankings?
:confused:
I would go for the first definition. But you can discuss about it.:D

I saw other signs of decline from Rafa than just losing to Djokovic, like how he played against everyone else on clay, Murray beeing so close to Nadal almost every set they played each other on clay last year, Federer winning more points than NAdal the first 3 sets in RG, going to 5 sets against Isner and beeing pushed around by players like Andujar and some italian challenger, in 2008 players like Almagro and Ferrer would fight for their life to win 2 games per set and now they just lose because Nadal is better in decisive moments.

His backhand is significantly worse than it once as, so is his returning and passing shots and it is difficult to neglect this. Nadal's decline is not happening anywhere close to as fast as I had predicted it would but it is as clear as day and night that it is happening right now.

misty1
03-18-2012, 04:23 PM
even after that choke at the Australian Davy was still playing well at events after that. But then he got injured and he's never been the same since

He has shown recently he's kind of coming back to where he was but injuries and illness are starting to affect him more often

misty1
03-18-2012, 04:25 PM
Rafa has declined. I don't know how much but the way he loses leads and gets broken when things get tight or even the way he fails to close out the matches is a clear sign that he's not as strong as he was a couple of years ago.

Not really a sign of decline physicially so much as more mental issues. He still competes fine but the fact that he gets tight trying to serve things out is more to do with the mental side of things. He just isnt as confident as he used to be

EddieNero
03-18-2012, 04:26 PM
I must agree Federer is currently playing the best tennis since he started to decline.
Can you picture Roger 2008-2010 beating Nadal at Indian Wells? Because I can't.

I believe Fed is enjoying a sort of short-term Renaissance of 2004-2007 form.

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 04:27 PM
even after that choke at the Australian Davy was still playing well at events after that. But then he got injured and he's never been the same since

He has shown recently he's kind of coming back to where he was but injuries and illness are starting to affect him more often

It would be lovely to have him and Nalbandian around in great form late this season teaching some things to the younger generation about beeing aggressive returners, creating angles and how to play indoor tennis (and how to beat Nadal).

Federer really needs some rivals indoors, the younger generation just cant play on those conditions so his old pals better get back to business and give him a challenge at the end of this year.

sexybeast
03-18-2012, 04:30 PM
I must agree Federer is currently playing the best tennis since he started to decline.
Can you picture Roger 2008-2010 beating Nadal at Indian Wells? Because I can

Part of it is because Federer learned how to play Nadal in 2009 and has been adjusting his tactics against Nadal bit for bit ever since, but he is not good enought anymore to constantly challenge the peaking NAdal. I belive he is 4-5 against Nadal since 2009 and has only played a really bad match in Miami since then. Federer's backhand is alot better since 2009 against Nadal but not so much against everybody else.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 04:33 PM
I must agree Federer is currently playing the best tennis since he started to decline.
Can you picture Roger 2008-2010 beating Nadal at Indian Wells? Because I can't.

I believe Fed is enjoying a sort of short-term Renaissance of 2004-2007 form.

There's no reason why it should be short term. Federer has had a mixture of huge form dips and minor form dips. However, each dip has been accentuated by stronger competition over the past 4 years. His 2008-2010 form would still have carried him to 3 out of 4 slams against the 2004 field, despite a noticeable loss of form.

I don't see any physical decline whatsoever and see no reason why he can't sustain his current form.

Allez
03-18-2012, 04:36 PM
He is playing as well now as he ever has. That is not the same as me saying that his level didn't dip at any point. His level has picked up again in the past 6 months. How can you possibly look at his current form and argue that he is inferior to 2006 Fed? He is playing incredible tennis. He has barely lost a match since last summer.

Are you telling us his movement & footwork (the pillars of his greatness) are even better at 30 than say at 25/26 ? Ignoring context much ? Winning no name tournaments in the last six months does not make this Roger EQUAL or BETTER than 2006/2007 Roger. Go back and watch the old vids and see what Roger could do on court because quite clearly you have forgotten.

finishingmove
03-18-2012, 04:38 PM
I must agree Federer is currently playing the best tennis since he started to decline.
Can you picture Roger 2008-2010 beating Nadal at Indian Wells? Because I can't.

I believe Fed is enjoying a sort of short-term Renaissance of 2004-2007 form.

Part of it is because Federer learned how to play Nadal in 2009 and has been adjusting his tactics against Nadal bit for bit ever since, but he is not good enought anymore to constantly challenge the peaking NAdal. I belive he is 4-5 against Nadal since 2009 and has only played a really bad match in Miami since then. Federer's backhand is alot better since 2009 against Nadal but not so much against everybody else.

He is doing well to get the most out of his 'old age', but he still can't cut it against Nadal in slams. This is proof that Nadal hasn't really declined like some say. I agree that Federer has improved his backhand somewhat, but he lost a bit of speed, his back doesn't hold up as well in the long run and he's lost his mental edge, especially in slams. These 3 are clear signs that Federer is declining.

finishingmove
03-18-2012, 04:41 PM
There's no reason why it should be short term. Federer has had a mixture of huge form dips and minor form dips. However, each dip has been accentuated by stronger competition over the past 4 years. His 2008-2010 form would still have carried him to 3 out of 4 slams against the 2004 field, despite a noticeable loss of form.

I don't see any physical decline whatsoever and see no reason why he can't sustain his current form.

Refer to my previous post. I pointed out signs of his decline, and also reasons why his current form is a bit deceptive actually. Until he wins another slam, he's just continuing his steady, slamless decline.

abraxas21
03-18-2012, 04:52 PM
federer hasn't been quite the same since his peak years in 2005, 2006 and early 2007.

however, i'd say that in the past 6 months he's been playing the best tennis i've seen of him since 2008. lots of ups and downs have passed since that year, though. i recall federer played almost as well as in his peak years in AO 2010, for example, and then played at his muggiest in the next months.

as for the reasons of roger's slow decline, the speed is the most notorious factor. fed's game depended (and still does) big time on his footwork and that's not quite the same as before. nowadays he makes less adjustment small steps and that in turn makes him more prone to errors and shanks. still, on a good day the differences are only minor...

Clydey
03-18-2012, 04:52 PM
Are you telling us his movement & footwork (the pillars of his greatness) are even better at 30 than say at 25/26?

Nope. I said no such thing. Try reading again and you'll get there eventually.

Winning no name tournaments in the last six months does not make this Roger EQUAL or BETTER than 2006/2007 Roger.

I'm not looking at tournament wins. I'm looking at his play and his competition. He is playing every bit as well as he ever has. Of course I don't expect everyone to agree, since there is nothing Roger could possibly do at this point to convince you that he is playing at a peak level right now. He could dominate for the next 5 years and I have no doubt people would rattle on about him still being 5% slower or some other unprovable bullshit.

And since when are the TMC and (probably) IW 'no name tournaments'? I can't abide posters who act as though there are only 4 tournaments that matter. If you truly believe that, fuck off and watch some other sport for the other 40 or so weeks.

Go back and watch the old vids and see what Roger could do on court because quite clearly you have forgotten.

Unlike MTF generally, I actually have a long term memory. I've seen Roger at his best and his worst. Rewatching old matches that I have seen multiple times won't change my opinion.

abraxas21
03-18-2012, 04:55 PM
I'm not looking at tournament wins. I'm looking at his play and his competition. He is playing every bit as well as he ever has. Of course I don't expect everyone to agree,

well, it's not reasonable to expect people to agree that federer is probly the first pro tennis player in history who has managed to play at his best level for over 6 years.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 04:58 PM
Refer to my previous post. I pointed out signs of his decline, and also reasons why his current form is a bit deceptive actually. Until he wins another slam, he's just continuing his steady, slamless decline.

I don't see any 'signs'. He can't cut it against Nadal in slams? Nadal is notorious for not being a player who phones in performances. Wiping the floor with him at the TMC and IW should not be overlooked. You also seem to be forgetting that Federer has always had trouble against Nadal, even when he dominated. Moreover, he struggled against a Nadal who had not yet matured.

Also, there has only been one major since he really picked up his form, or perhaps two if you include the US Open. Are you really going to hold that loss to Djokovic against him? Federer has never been like Nadal in the mental department. And we needn't even deconstruct the AO loss to Nadal. As I've already said, Rafa has always been and always will be a bad matchup for him

rocketassist
03-18-2012, 05:01 PM
There's no reason why it should be short term. Federer has had a mixture of huge form dips and minor form dips. However, each dip has been accentuated by stronger competition over the past 4 years. His 2008-2010 form would still have carried him to 3 out of 4 slams against the 2004 field, despite a noticeable loss of form.

I don't see any physical decline whatsoever and see no reason why he can't sustain his current form.

He doesn't move as well, he doesn't time his forehand as well as he once did (albeit it's still a great shot from time to time) and his backhand's regressed a hell of a lot.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 05:01 PM
well, it's not reasonable to expect people to agree that federer is probly the first pro tennis player in history who has managed to play at his best level for over 6 years.

People really don't take the time to read on this forum.

I stated repeatedly that his form dipped from 2008 onwards. I said it had picked up over the past 6 months.

I'm not sure how I can make myself any clearer. I did not say that he has played at a peak level non-stop for 6 years.

reery
03-18-2012, 05:01 PM
I must agree Federer is currently playing the best tennis since he started to decline.
Can you picture Roger 2008-2010 beating Nadal at Indian Wells? Because I can't.

I believe Fed is enjoying a sort of short-term Renaissance of 2004-2007 form.




The only top 4 players that seem to be declining are Nadal and Murray a little bit as well. Nadal and Murray were better in 2008-2009 than now.. Meanwhile Federer and Djokovic are better now than a couple of years ago.

I wouldn't be surprised if Nole and Roger share the slams this year.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 05:02 PM
He doesn't move as well, he doesn't time his forehand as well as he once did (albeit it's still a great shot from time to time) and his backhand's regressed a hell of a lot.

This is all subjective (as is my view). I see no evidence of any of the above and, many will agree, his backhand is possibly a better shot now.

rocketassist
03-18-2012, 05:09 PM
This is all subjective (as is my view). I see no evidence of any of the above and, many will agree, his backhand is possibly a better shot now.

Once in a blue moon it has a great day, like Murray at the AO final 2010, but nowadays it's not even the best single hander in Switzerland.

His serve has remained intact though and that's a key reason why he remains at the top echelons. Without it, an attacking player like him would drop down the rankings on today's conditions/surfaces.

Clydey
03-18-2012, 05:15 PM
Once in a blue moon it has a great day, like Murray at the AO final 2010, but nowadays it's not even the best single hander in Switzerland.

His serve has remained intact though and that's a key reason why he remains at the top echelons. Without it, an attacking player like him would drop down the rankings on today's conditions/surfaces.

It never was the best single-hander in Switzerland. Wawa's has always been better. I'm not sure where this idea came from, that Federer's backhand was a weapon or even particularly reliable from 2004-2007. It wasn't. His struggles with a young Nadal indicate that it has always been a fairly significant weakness.

Anyway, neither of us will convince the other, so we might as well agree to disagree. My days of debating on MTF all day are behind me.

fsoica
03-18-2012, 05:20 PM
Federer - peaked in 2007, yet to decline.....


I think Federer peaked in the end of 2003 (TMC) and stayed at the peak form until, let's say 2007 Dubai. From then on there were signs of decline, but the best way to describe it would be to say he continuously adapted his game to his age. Fed was a late bloomer.

Nadal is yet inside his peak period, which started in 2008 when he was able to start adapting his game to all surfaces (and the surfaces were changing in a way that suited his playing style). His clay peak started in 2005, basically one and a half year later after turning pro. He was a prodigy. From 2008 on, he continuously and successfully adapted his game in order to alleviate the mileage problem that was becoming an issue too soon in his career.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-18-2012, 05:32 PM
lets face it chaps

federer is a one off- we all knew it when he beat sampras

federer (like laver, borg) can hit the special level where he is unplayable

it doesn't matter where and when- when fed gets hot he cant be touched

even though nadal is the worst matchup possible- he still beats him at 75% of the surfaces- that stat alone tells how mentally strong roger his- how amazing his game is

federer stands alone- and although he isnt the same man he once was- he is still good

Macbrother
03-18-2012, 06:11 PM
It never was the best single-hander in Switzerland. Wawa's has always been better. I'm not sure where this idea came from, that Federer's backhand was a weapon or even particularly reliable from 2004-2007. It wasn't. His struggles with a young Nadal indicate that it has always been a fairly significant weakness.

Anyway, neither of us will convince the other, so we might as well agree to disagree. My days of debating on MTF all day are behind me.

You really think Federer defends as well as he did when he was 24? You think his on the run game is just as potent as 6 years ago? Really?

Federer is far from being in a wheelchair but it seems quite clear to me the consistent explosiveness that he was able to unleash at his best is a thing of the past. What was an immaculate forehand every third rally is now just once in a while. This is just the eye test, of course, forget results because they can always be misleading; although I agree he's certainly playing better right now than at any time in the past few years, his 2 majors in '09 included.

sexybeast
03-19-2012, 12:01 AM
I wonder if Federer somewhere in the future finds Nadal's curve decling ahead of his own?

I must say Nadal is just fighting ahead better than I thought he would for his age, he still has incredible legs and incredible spirit to improve his game, anyway this is the curves up to end of 2012 according to rankings:

http://www.tennis28.com/charts/Federer_Nadal_rankingpoints.GIF

Federer should have gone up a little at the same level he has been since end of 2008 and might now be climbing his top since 2008 the coming month or so, Nadal on the other hand might decline alot the coming months, it will be a very interesting season to follow.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
03-19-2012, 02:24 AM
This is all subjective (as is my view). I see no evidence of any of the above and, many will agree, his backhand is possibly a better shot now.

many will disagree

TBkeeper
03-19-2012, 08:32 AM
ok guys you know me i don't like Nadal at all but i think he isn't declining right now ..... even if he is the decline is slower than Federers .....
and i wonder why you began to describe only Nadal and Federers decline ?

HKz
03-19-2012, 08:50 AM
It never was the best single-hander in Switzerland. Wawa's has always been better. I'm not sure where this idea came from, that Federer's backhand was a weapon or even particularly reliable from 2004-2007. It wasn't. His struggles with a young Nadal indicate that it has always been a fairly significant weakness.

Anyway, neither of us will convince the other, so we might as well agree to disagree. My days of debating on MTF all day are behind me.

That backhand flick pre-2006 was absolutely amazing though. He showed some of it during 2007, but I mean he used to pass anyone with his backhand.

Filo V.
03-19-2012, 01:34 PM
Roger's BH was more of a weapon against players outside of Nadal in his heyday. It was more crisp and less vulnerable to attack. He hit the DTL BH more consistently and effectively. His BH is more of a set-up shot now, but that's beginning to change of late as Roger's gaining confidence in his game. He's using the BH as a weapon more often, which has greatly helped his overall game.

emotion
03-19-2012, 02:31 PM
Great graph